Iron Front: Liberation 1944

[beEZ]

Has anyone played this game? If yes, in which way does it differ or resemble RO2? I have read about it, and it seems to be filled with bugs. I do not want to give my money just to find out I won't be playing the game.

[beEZ]

By the way, what's the deal with steam underlining some random words in people's topics.

[Moskeeto]

Iron Front is more like ArmA II set in WWII. It's not comparable to RO2 at all.

Also, I have no idea what you mean by underlined words.

[beEZ]

引用自 RST Moskeeto：

Iron Front is more like ArmA II set in WWII. It's not comparable to RO2 at all.

Also, I have no idea what you mean by underlined words.

I never played Arma II so I would not know. Why isn't it comparable to RO2. As far as I've heard, both games are WWII simulators, realistic, seem to have tanks and infantry, to me it seems that those 2 can be well compared. It is not like comparing a zombie killing game and FIFA game.

[BlueMind]

I bought Iron Front and tested it. It's a different game than RO2 despite they are WW2 simulation. Iron Front is more slower, but more realist. Combats are different too and personally, I don't like how the movements are (not fluid for me).
RO2 has a better wound and kill system than Iron Front. For me, graphics and animation are better too. The Territory and Countdown game types are more interesting and RO2 can hold up to 64 players (32 in each side).
The two games have bugs but I steel prefer RO2 for a lot of reason :)

Maybe, go to youtube and watch some ingame-movies of the 2 games.

[Moskeeto]

RO2 isn't a simulator. It's a competitive FPS with realistic mechanics.

[Emmanuel de Grouchy]

引用自 RST Moskeeto：

RO2 isn't a simulator. It's a competitive FPS with realistic mechanics.

same can be said for any war sim from a fp perspective really

[Moskeeto]

引用自 Emmanuel de Grouchy：

引用自 RST Moskeeto：

RO2 isn't a simulator. It's a competitive FPS with realistic mechanics.

same can be said for any war sim from a fp perspective really

RO2 isn't meant to be a sim. Iron Front is.

[Santa Six]

Iron Fron will be geting a patch soon to fix bugs. Also, it will be gating some DLC based on a different theater. You can download the FREE Arma 2 version to get a feel of the mechanics.
Part 1 http://youtu.be/T2MRwAijKJs
Part 2 http://youtu.be/2oL98wA39aY

(I have both games. No longer playing RO2. Curintly playing IF44)

[hermionegrangerfan45]

Well Iron front is p much dead unless you play with a group of friends. RO2 is a realistic ww2 fps, Iron front is a simulator just like arma 2. Imo eastern front doesnt go well with arma 2 :P

[Vincini]

Iron Front is played out very tight and uses mechanics from the real world. Like a 9mm bullet will drop at this distance if shot at this height and angle. And it really is not fun unless you have people to play with. Iron Front is a great game, but it just lacks a community

[Yggdrasil]

Iron Front has a higher learning curve and a HUD and keyboard functions that require a lot of fiddling with in game. It looks great and is very sophisticated, with a greater variety of vehicles. However, if I want a more active MP game, RO2 is better.

If you like designing your own single player missions or playing other single player missions, IF44 is much better than RO2 with its underwhelming "campaign" single player missions. So I guess it depends on what you like. I own both, but it's been a while since I played IF44.

[Longblade44]

Iron Front keeps crashing on me-i can not even play it...RO2 is a great game.

[Scipio Americanus]

Iron Front is kinda like a buggier version of Red Orchestra: Ostfront 41-45, i would recommend RO and RO2 over it

[DRINKWATER]

Iron front is trying to be more realistic but it simulates a more modern realism instead of ww2 realism. It has arma rages instead of the more urban setting that ww2 had.

[John Courtier]

引用自 beEZ СРБ：

引用自 RST Moskeeto：

Iron Front is more like ArmA II set in WWII. It's not comparable to RO2 at all.

Also, I have no idea what you mean by underlined words.

I never played Arma II so I would not know. Why isn't it comparable to RO2. As far as I've heard, both games are WWII simulators, realistic, seem to have tanks and infantry, to me it seems that those 2 can be well compared. It is not like comparing a zombie killing game and FIFA game.

ARMA 2 Engine: wide openspace areas = long distance vision and shooting and fighting (on fields, forests). Fine, some action might be placed also in a village. I don't own Iron Front, but I do Arma 2 (retail disc version) and OA on steam. As I saw gameplay videos, it looks like arma with different guns.

RO2 on the other hand offers CQB at stations, ruins, bombed houses/villages, squares.. Yes, there is also plenty of space, you can shoot on 150+ m - but you probably won't hit anything if it moves.

My decision - if I want to tactically conquer a country in FPS, to crush the army of enemies, to take the field by lots of vehicles accompanied by footsoldiers -> ARMA 2 engine.

If I want to take cover, crawl, camp, and fight house to house, meter per meter and to cover my buddy's back in terrifying atmosphere of death, where even a single tank is a problem -> RO2.